|
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
In a court of law a case has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not beyond that doubt. You present the evidence and claim it as proven but its not proven. If it was then there'd be no room left for skepticism. |
yes, and people still think elvis is alive. this has nothing to do with the lack of evidence to the contrary.
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
hypocrisy. you admit ignoring the questions raised by CTs and then demand they answer your own. |
not true at all. i spend hours and hours pouring over CT research last year. and i came up with questions at that stage, but also more recently. which were ignored. i have dont my best to answer questions relating as best i can. which is difficult coz im obviously not a subject-matter expert.
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
the theories won't go away because they have footing to stand on, albeit you might choose to ignore this footing, but if it werent there then the CTs wouldn't be either. concerning the fires try the following Dr. Steven E. Jones(links to pdf), Kevin Ryan, Morgan Reynolds. these are not Joe Schmoes, they have degrees and credibility |
*sighs* ill just deal with jones, as he is one of the major players in the whole 9/11 debate. firstly, jones is NOT an engineer, and not even remotely qualified to analyse the complexities of the WTC collapses. his experience is in cold fusion (ie the turning lead into gold of physics), recently stood down by his university, and his paper has yet to receive any critical review from any engineering peer group.
| quote: |
Brigham Young University doesn't want anything to do with the paper.
A few department chairmen at Jones's university have issued critical statements, though none of these has yet addressed any of the points which Jones made in his paper and at his presentation at BYU. Chairman of the BYU department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dr. Miller, is on record stating in an e-mail, "I think without exception, the structural engineering professors in our department are not in agreement with the claims made by Jones in his paper, and they don't think there is accuracy and validity to these claims".
The BYU physics department has also issued a statement: "The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty members. Professor Jones's department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review." The College of Engineering and Technology department has also added, "The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones." |
for your information, jones' other paper is entitled "Behold My Hands: Evidence for Christ's Visit in Ancient America
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
and you ignore the The Naudet brothers' footage of the NYC firemen describing a controlled demolition the day of Sept. 11, and the evidence of a bomb going off in the lobby of WTC well before the buildings collapsed which includes the NYC firemen's own accounts of such evidence. |
all those testimonies are either taken out of context, or are the descriptions from panicked people on a day where all kinds of chaotic things were occuring.
| quote: |
A video is shown on just about every conspiracy web site which shows a few fireman discussing what they heard and saw.
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out …
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det…
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom…
In the context of reading it off a conspiracy site this may sound like damming evidence. They are saying “detonated” and “they had planned to take down a building”. They even say “Boom” to describe the sound. But if you hear the other things they’re saying, their body language and context outside the conspiracy theory setting, something else emerges. Before or after every description is “As if”. “As if they had planned to take down a building”. “It was as if as if they had detonated”. They also use body language to show it was the sound of the floors crashing into one another.
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom- (hand moves down)
boom…
This could be just as powerful evidence of pancaking as the use of explosives. But the real evidence isn’t so much examining the video as examining the actions taken, or NOT taken, by the NYC Fire Department after the event. The NYC Fire Department hasn’t rallied its members to force an investigation into the possible murder of over 300 of its members. Some sites offer an explanation of this saying there was a gag order placed on the Fire Department. The only place you will find this is on conspiracy theory sites. No mention from main stream press about the hundreds if not thousands of fireman on the scene not being allowed to talk. |
why do you elevate those that thought they heard bombs above all the countless people that did not?
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
A few parts of a huge boeing 757. Where are the wings, tail, bodies of 50+ passengers? |
um, have you ever seen a plane wreckage? theres bit and pieces and not much else.
ill ask you, where are the passengers if they werent on a plane? not one CTist has ever answered me that question.
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
I could say the same thing about proving them. You've presented close to nothing but opinion and certainly haven't proved anything beyond a resonable doubt. Admittingly, the main body of evidence from that day consists of video footage and photographs that rely on interpretation. |
again, bullshit josh. ive been posting stuff in 9/11 threads for fucking ages. no, not much in this thread coz im sick and tired of arguing with people that dont do anything to rebutt what i have stated.
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
At present moment there isn't enough evidence to prove anything either way. But don't come in here screaming no bullshit while simultaneously flinging your own. |
well, common sense should tell you that if there is insufficient evidence you should hardly entertain the idea that there are dark elves living on the far side of the moon.
the simple fact is the 9/11 CT movement has virtually nothing to strap all its outlandish claims upon. your mere mentioning of jones' supposed "research" just goes to show that you havent read anything critical of his work. which puts you in the average CT category- the lazy man's conpiracist- likes what he reads coz we're not experts and it sounds plausible without any contrary information at hand.
debunking 911.com is your friend
___________________
|
